8 septembre 2012

Plus de 95% des entreprises au sein de l’Union européenne sont de petites et moyennes entreprises et très souvent des micro-entreprises.
Bénéficier d’un dispositif de formation continue pose souvent problème, la plupart des formations disponibles n’étant pas adaptées aux besoins des TPE.
Le projet BizLearn cherche à développer une nouvelle culture de formation en proposant aux TPE de nouveaux modèles et des formules plus souples et plus adaptées. Entrepreneurs et employés pourront développer leurs capacités professionnelles et contribuer à l’innovation et à la compétitivité de leurs entreprises.

9 pays européens pour réfléchir à la problématique de la formation
Le partenariat européen est large, neuf pays sont investis dans le projet pour comparer leurs problématiques et mettre en commun leurs outils de formation.
Le CRED IUT de Bordeaux 1 est pleinement concerné par le sujet de la formation et a travaillé dans un premier temps au repérage des freins au développement de la formation dans les TPE:

• un système organisationnel très particulier: peu d’effectifs, un manque de ressource pour les actions de formation mais aussi une plus grande flexibilité;
• un système actuel de formation continue peu adapté aux particularités des TPE;
• un chef d’entreprise qui cumule de multiples fonctions et ne voit pas forcément dans la formation une opportunité stratégique majeure.

Un réseau de petites et micro-entreprises pour des espaces de formation
De nombreux clusters régionaux ont été identifiés lors des rencontres de l’innovation en Aquitaine (Sysolia, photonique - Eskal Eureka, BTP - Alliance numérique, technologies numériques -Topos, navigation par satellite - Glisse, industrie du sport – Eolien, industrie de l’éolien – Inno’vin, filière vinicole, etc.).
C’est finalement le CESIM, club d’entreprises de Saint-Jean d’Illac  en Gironde qui a choisi de s’associer au projet et d’expérimenter de nouvelles formes d’apprentissage  pour des entreprises plus performantes.
En parallèle, une enquête a été menée auprès des TPE pour connaitre leurs besoins précis en matière de formation.
Des micro-modules de formation
Les partenaires s’engagent à mettre en ligne des modules de formation qui traiteront de sujets multiples: les clés pour mener efficacement un entretien de recrutement, la gestion d’un fichier client, le référencement du site internet de l’entreprise, la répartition des tâches dans une équipe projet, etc., autant de thèmes en phase avec les intérêts des entreprises questionnées.
Contact
CRED IUT Bordeaux 1
15 rue Naudet – CS 10207
33175 Gradignan cedex
Amélie Perret, Directrice
amelie.perret@iut.u-bordeaux1.fr
Partenairesdu projet
Allemagne (coordinateur),Pologne, Estonie, Pays-Bas, Portugal, Suède, Italie, Royaume-Uni
Site internet du projet
https://sites.google.com/site/bizlearnproject/home.

Collaborations, alliances and mergers in higher education: Lessons learned and guidance for institutions
This document sets out lessons learned from collaborations, alliances and mergers in higher education, and guidance for higher education institutions. It follows HEFCE 2012/06, Collaborations, alliances and mergers in higher education: Consultation on lessons learned and guidance for institutions.
Download: Main Report. See also Collaborations, alliances and mergers in higher education: Outcomes of consultation.
Executive summary
Purpose
1. This document sets out lessons learned from collaborations, alliances and mergers (CAM) in higher education, and guidance for higher education institutions (HEIs).
2. CAM activities have long been an important feature of the higher education (HE) landscape, but in spite of this, relatively little is generally known about the subject. We therefore conducted this study to help the HE sector learn from institutions’ past experience and improve the likelihood of success when collaborations, alliances and/or mergers are entered into. The guidance set out in this report is intended to be helpful and informative, and not directive or prescriptive.
3. We have covered a range of collaborations and mergers, drawing from case studies in England and overseas, interviews, existing literature and other published information. For this project we have used the following definitions:
• Collaboration: two or more partners working together in a particular area of business, which may involve combining existing operations, pooling areas of expertise or creating something entirely new. This project focuses on institutional arrangements rather than relationships between groups of academics. There are many different forms of such collaborations, such as joint research institutes or joint faculties, which might have their own distinct brand. Sometimes collaborative ventures are known as partnerships or cooperation agreements. In this report we discuss the general characteristics of these various forms, so that we can compare them with mergers.
• Alliance: a more systemic form of collaboration between two or more partners, covering a wider range (but not all) of their operations, where the partners retain their separate identities.
• Merger: two or more partners combining to create a single institution, which may retain the name and legal status of one of them or be an entirely new legal entity. In the ‘holding company’ model, one institution can have subsidiaries that retain separate names, brands and operations, to varying degrees. Federations can be seen as a more flexible version of full merger.
4. This project was guided by an expert steering group whose members had experience of CAM activity across the HE and private sectors. We have written this report for a variety of audiences: principally for senior managers and governors, because of the importance of leadership and governance in all CAM projects; and also for staff, students and other stakeholders of HEIs.
Key points
Context
5. The pace of change in the HE sector is probably accelerating in many countries due to a number of complex and interacting factors, such as globalisation, internationalisation, the growing role of the private sector, increasing use of international rankings of institutions, and changing student needs and expectations. In England the new approach to the funding of teaching, and changes taking place to other major sources of funding, will also have a big impact on institutional behaviour, as will the renewed emphasis on placing students at the centre of the system. In various European countries and in Wales there have been major CAM developments, often actively promoted by governments to strengthen institutions and improve performance.
6. Institutions are being challenged as never before to reconsider their fundamental role, market position, structures, relationships, partnerships, policies and processes. They will need to continue questioning how they operate internally, engage externally with other institutions and organisations, and interact with the wider society. This raises the profile and potential relevance of collaborations, alliances and mergers as part of institutions’ response to the drivers for change. Nonetheless, institutions are autonomous and there is no question of a top-down approach in England.
Learning from past experience
7. Institutions can learn from what has worked well or less well elsewhere. Most research in the HE sector, both in the UK and in other countries, has focused on mergers rather than collaborations, alliances, consortia or joint ventures. Moreover, there is a lack of publicly available information in the form of evaluation reports and other analyses of outcomes that might show the impact of CAM activity, particularly over the longer term. There are no reliable estimates of success in CAM projects in the HE sector.
8. The much larger body of research in the private (commercial) sector consistently estimates that a high percentage of mergers fail outright or do not achieve the expected benefits in terms of increased shareholder value or efficiency gains. There are also high failure rates for alliances and joint ventures. Notwithstanding the many differences with HE, some of the general lessons from the private sector are worth noting.
9. We commissioned a literature review and conducted our own research into the sector’s experience, largely through nine case studies representing a range of CAM activity. Although there are many possible types of relationship, our aim was to derive general principles that would be helpful in most situations.
Major themes and lessons learned
10. The main findings are organised under three headings that address fundamental questions institutions are likely to ask:
a. What form of relationship is most appropriate in this particular case?
b. What evidence is necessary to inform decision-making?
c. What process should be adopted to ensure the most effective outcome?
These questions are addressed in the following three sections:
Forms of relationship
11. A clear case based on the core purposes of HEIs – teaching, research and knowledge exchange – should be at the heart of all CAM projects. This implies a strong focus on students, the academic community and the wider society. Publicly funded institutions should consider the ‘public good’ as well as business needs. Economic issues should not be ignored.
Economies of scale can be important in advancing academic aims, for example by achieving critical mass in research or ensuring the viability of courses. Successful CAM projects have a strong academic purpose that is underpinned by a sound economic rationale.
12. Issues about the size and scale of institutions are complex and inadequately researched in the existing literature; but size in and of itself is rarely a good argument for merger. The relative size of the partners can be a significant consideration. Some mergers may have a dominant partner, but these can still be satisfactory for both parties. Efforts to present a ‘merger of equals’ can lead to costly compromises, but sometimes this is necessary to achieve a longer-term objective.
13. Any new entity or venture should aim to achieve more than could be delivered by the individual parties separately. The proposal should reflect a clear strategic need, and the parties should agree a ‘strategic narrative’, based on a simple, forward-looking idea that can be easily understood and communicated. This will clarify the purpose, underpin the argument for change, provide direction and help make sense of the various actions being taken.
14. CAM projects can enable institutions to share risk with partners in achieving their objectives. This can involve sharing costs, acquiring expertise or capacity, achieving critical mass or accelerating development. These possible advantages need to be balanced against the inherent risk of the projects themselves.
15. There are many different types of relationship across the ‘CAM spectrum’: from associations and purchasing consortia at the ‘softer’ end (lower risk, easily unwound), through various forms of institutional collaboration and joint ventures, to full merger at the ‘harder’ end (higher risk, not easily unwound). In some cases, collaboration (possibly leading to a strategic alliance) can bring many of the benefits of merger without the same cost or level of disruption. On the other hand, merger can bring more commitment from the parties and might achieve deeper and more extensive change.
16. Merger in particular can be a ‘point of discontinuity’ with the past, allowing institutions to achieve a whole series of changes that would be more difficult to achieve piecemeal during ‘business as usual’. Mergers are likely to be more successful where, through a careful analysis of objectives and activities, most of the institutions’ major operations are compatible or complementary.
17. Geography and distance sometimes constrain the effectiveness of mergers, so selective collaboration might be a more viable alternative. Co-location is often necessary to deliver significant synergy or efficiency. It is important to consider the impact on students and staff of any rationalisation of multi-site operations.
18. Whether to retain an existing brand or develop a new one is an important issue. This reflects the growing significance of name recognition, linked to institutional identity and differentiation, to prospective students, employees, employers and other partners and funders.
Evidence to inform decision-making
19. The evidence to inform decision-making should reflect the nature of the proposal; institutions should avoid seeing the case for a particular proposal as being self-evident. A rigorous options review, prepared objectively and subject to consultation, should precede any agreement in principle, and it is important to engage with dissenting views. Where a proposal affects students, their interests and needs will be a major priority.
20. The various options should be tested for affordability and the possible sources of funding investigated. In future, public funding is less likely to be available than in the recent past. Institutions will need to take a particularly rigorous approach to costing and financing.
21. Merger costs are often underestimated, particularly in areas such as harmonising pay and benefits structures, ICT systems and administrative processes. These costs can be very substantial where the merger is between higher and further education institutions. In general there is a tendency to emphasise renewing the estate, which can easily be presented as a clear outcome from merger. Other costs, including opportunity costs, may be more difficult to estimate, but they should not be overlooked.
22. Institutions may see the potential for economies of scale, especially in ‘back office’ operations and over the longer term. Where it is essential to reduce cost, this should be done promptly and openly, in consultation with staff and other interested parties; and the effect on students should be assessed and managed carefully so as to safeguard their experience.
23. Given the tendency to underestimate costs and risks, particular attention needs to be paid to due diligence, and it should not be done so late in the process that its results cannot be properly taken into account and the proposal reconsidered or renegotiated if necessary.
The process
24. Leadership from the outset is vital: all the initial questions concern mission and strategy, and leaders can help to drive the whole process, overcome obstacles and negotiate with stakeholders.
25. Institutions and their potential partners should develop a shared vision before acting, as clarity about objectives will energise the parties and avoid wasted effort.
26. Communication and dialogue with stakeholders, especially staff and students, are essential throughout the process. Support will be developed and resistance reduced if there is a concerted effort to explain the vision and address fears. Expectations need to be managed and kept realistic.
27. The senior management structure and governance arrangements in the new institution or venture need to be agreed at an early stage, perhaps as part of a memorandum of understanding. If these issues are not resolved, ambiguity may undermine trust, or senior managers and governors who have a strong commitment to existing structures could be an obstacle to change.
28. There needs to be adequate oversight of the project, often in the form of a joint working group and/or shadow board. Project management would normally be devolved to a separate task force or project team, which needs adequate resources to manage the whole process. At the same time it is vital to ensure the continuity of existing business operations.
29. Almost all institutions say their CAM projects required more time, effort and money than they originally expected. This observation accords with private sector experience, where the benefits are often overestimated and the costs and degree of difficulty underestimated. General optimism about what can be achieved can help to overcome obstacles along the way, but there may also be a lack of understanding of the demands of mergers and collaborations and their consequences.
30. The change process is dynamic, often messy and subject to the influence of unexpected events; institutions should therefore agree ‘break points’ to mitigate the risk of being swept along and missing warning signs. An implementation plan is an essential part of the process, and it should be kept under review and modified as necessary.
31. Investment and restructuring are often necessary to deliver real benefits, and the advantages and disadvantages of doing this sooner or later should be carefully weighed. Attention should be paid to the respective institutional cultures, which can affect the success or failure of attempts to achieve organisational change.
32. Government agencies can provide practical support, such as advice and objectivity, as well as funding. External funders should avoid onerous, inappropriate and inflexible monitoring arrangements.
Governance
33. In addressing the above issues it is essential to recognise the role of proper governance arrangements. Governing bodies need to be engaged from the outset, alongside senior management, in considering what form of relationship might be most suitable for their institutions, the evidence that needs to be gathered to make the right decision, and what processes should be put in place to manage the project effectively. While supporting senior managers, they will provide necessary challenge and safeguard the interests of their institutions. They have specific legal duties as trustees of charities.
Guidance for institutions
34. From the findings referred to in paragraphs 10-33 we have updated our guidance for institutions on a process to develop CAM projects (see Annex A). This is a general guide, not a set of formal requirements or an attempt at comprehensive best practice. It identifies key stages which will be relevant in most cases:
• options review
• testing the feasibility of the preferred option
• memorandum of understanding
• consultation
• business case (especially for external funding)
• review and revision of the proposal
• approvals
• implementation plan
• monitoring and evaluation.
35. During the study many institutions said it would have been helpful if detailed guidance had been available to them in technical areas, such as tax, pensions, equal opportunities, due diligence, change management and implementation planning. This could have saved time in reaching decisions and made it easier to deliver their projects effectively. We will continue to discuss with the sector and its representative bodies whether, when and how to commission such studies.
36. We encourage institutions to evaluate their CAM activity. We also suggest that they publish the results in a suitable format, to continue disseminating the lessons learned to the wider sector and provide a basis for further research. This could take place through HEFCE’s web-site or some other appropriate national body.
HEFCE’s policy on CAM activity
37. The project was designed to present objective findings to help institutions make better decisions. In responding to potential CAM projects in the sector in the future, we will be guided by a set of principles, set out at Annex D, focusing on:
• HEFCE’s primary role of safeguarding the collective interests of current and prospective students and the wider public, encouraging the development of a more diverse and dynamic sector and supporting student choice
• maintaining an intelligent, open and constructive working relationship with all types of institutions and other partners
• providing objective assessment where public funding or student interest is involved
• securing the strength and sustainability of institutions across the sector, while respecting institutional autonomy.
Updating the guidance
38. Change in the higher education sector may lead to the development of new forms of CAM activity, particularly where these involve commercial partners or private providers. Increasingly HEIs are entering into international ventures, often with overseas institutions. The relationship between HEIs and further education colleges is also evolving under the new teaching funding arrangements and student number controls.
39. Some of these activities will indicate important issues not covered by this report. The publication of project summaries and evaluations mentioned in paragraph 36 would help the sector to learn from its own experience, as would further research by academics. HEFCE will continue to survey developments in the sector and will formally review this guidance in three years’ time to ensure that it remains comprehensive and relevant.
40. In the meantime, we invite institutions to talk to us about their CAM projects, whether this is a formal requirement under the Financial Memorandum with HEFCE (as in the case of mergers) or simply as part of a continuing constructive dialogue.

Jobs 4 Europe: The Employment Policy Conference, 6 - 7 September 2012, Brussels, Belgium. Venue: European Commission, Charlemagne Building, 170 Rue de la Loi - 1040 Brussels
Objectives
The European Commission is organising a major conference on employment policy: Jobs 4 Europe. This event will build on the Employment Package put forward by the Commission on 18 April 2012 and on the outcomes of the 2012 European Semester, but also on a series of conferences which the Commission organised during 2011 in order to explore new dimensions of employment policy, notably regarding the functioning of European labour markets, wage developments, flexicurity in a crisis context, and inequalities.
The conference will be structured around five main topics:
    Building a dynamic European labour market: transitions, human capital investment, mobility
    Impact of the crisis on employment: "programme countries", wages, jobless households
    Sectors with high job-creation potential: green economy, white coat jobs, information and communication technologies (ICT)
    Employment policy throughout the life cycle: youth, gender & work-life balance, active ageing
    Pathways to full employment: job guarantee, social economy, welfare to work.
Eurofound contribution
Robert Anderson will contribute to Barriers to women's employment and work-life balance as a panellist from 10.40 - 12.20 on Thursday 6 September. Juan Menéndez-Valdés will chair the session on Active ageing – the labour market dimension from 16:45 – 18:30 on 6 September.
A programme is available on the EC website.

As part of its strategy for creating jobs and growth, the Commission has launched an initiative to boost the recognition of skills and competences gained outside school or university.
Through this recommendation, the Commission is urging Member States to establish national systems for the validation of non-formal and informal learning by 2015. This would allow citizens to obtain a full or partial qualification on the basis of skills and competences acquired outside formal education. Only Finland, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands currently have comprehensive systems in place for validation of non-formal and informal learning.
"In a time of high unemployment and low economic growth, it is essential that Europe develops the right mix of skills and competences to boost competitiveness, prosperity and social inclusion," says Androulla Vassiliou, Commissioner for Education, Culture, Multilingualism and Youth.
The Commission's proposal will be discussed by the Council and is due to be adopted by education and youth ministers on 23-24 November 2012.
More information:

• Proposal for a Council Recommendation on the validation of non-formal and informal learning
• European Commission: Education and training and validation of non-formal and informal learning
• Commissioner Androulla Vassiliou's website

Vocational Education and Training: Policy and Practice in the field of Special Education. 12.11.2012 - 13.11.2012. Location: 'FILOXENIA' Conference Centre, Lefkosia (Nicosia).
This is the final conference of a three-year project sponsored by the European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education.
The major aims of the conference are:
(a) the identification of the successful factors and challenges that together form the added-value of the European-wide project
(b) the exploration of current trends in the labor market towards higher qualification needs and the market for low qualified people, and
(c) the presentation of examples of good practice in the field of Vocational Education and Training for students with Special Education Needs.
In the Conference, the participants will be experts in the field, as well as representatives by the European Agency Countries.

21st Annual EfVET International Conference. The drive toward European Credit Transfer within Vocational Education and Training (ECVET) and the new LLP programme ’Erasmus for All’ 2014 - 2020. Palma de Mallorca, 24th–27th October 2012 Wednesday
24th October
18:00 – 19:00 Welcome and information session for new members and first time participants: -“Introduction to EfVET and the conference”. Mr Peter Hodgson, President of EfVET, and the Steering Committee members
19:00 – 20:00 Reception for all delegates and partners: Hotel MELIÁ PALAS ATENEA
20:00 Dinner/cultural evening: Hotel MELIÁ PALAS ATENEA Thursday
25th October
09:15 – 09:25 Welcome to PALMA DE MALLORCA: Day Chair Dr Stylianos Mavromoustakos
Welcome to the conference: Mrs Marian de Villanueva – Spanish National Representative and Conference Host
09:25 – 09:45 Welcome to PALMA DE MALLORCA and opening of Conference – Major of Palma de Mallorca (tbc)
09:45 – 10:15 Setting the theme: Mr Pete Hodgson, President of EfVET
10:15 – 10:45 Keynote speaker:
Mr Jan Truszczynski, Director General Education and Culture, European Commission addressing the new programme and the two initiatives Erasmus for All and ECVET
10:45 – 11:10 Refreshment break
11:10 – 11.40 ECVET – its implementation, timescales and review of 11 Pilot projects – implications for European VET institutions – Ms Daniela Ulicna, GHK Consulting Ltd
11.40 – 13.10 Workshop session 1
- Employability skills development and meeting the needs of the unemployed –both young and mature persons
- Tackling early ‘drop out’ and re-engaging young people in education and training
- Skills development through Entrepreneurship training
- The role of mobility in expanding opportunity – The value added of participation in the Europemobility Network, Mr Stefano Tirati (CSCS)
- Innovation in teaching, curriculum development and learning outcomes, Mr Luis Costa (ANESPO)
- The increasing need for collaboration and partnership across the VET arena Ms Annejet de Goede (NL)
14:30 – 16:00 Workshop session 2
- Employability skills development and meeting the needs of the unemployed –both young and mature persons
- Tackling early ‘drop out’ and re-engaging young people in education and training
- Skills development through Entrepreneurship training
- The role of mobility in expanding opportunity – The value added of participation in the Europemobility Network, Mr Stefano Tirati (CSCS)
- Innovation in teaching, curriculum development and learning outcomes, Mr Luis Costa (ANESPO)
- The increasing need for collaboration and partnership across the VET arena Ms Annejet de Goede (NL)
16:30 – 17.00 Keynote speaker:
European Quality Assurance Framework and tools for improving quality in VET (on-line quality assurance/assessment tool) Mr Sean Feerick or Mr Keith Brumfitt (tbc)
26th October
09:00 – 10:00 Annual General Meeting
10:00 – 10:40 Keynote speaker:
Representative from the Cyprus LLP National Agency Erasmus for All Programme- National perspective, Ms Androula Papanastasiou – Director of Cyprus LLP National Agency
10.40 -11.25 Gallery Walk of poster session: allowing all delegates to explore over 30 or so European projects and development initiatives
12.05 – 13.05 Roundtables – session 1
Conference offers European project partners the opportunity to disseminate progress, results and products of their Transnational Transfer of Innovation; Development of Innovation and other European initiatives – a key to successful valorisation of project outcomes and sustainability
Two sessions of 30 minutes each
(Note: Delegates will have time throughout the conference to explore project outcomes and results and indeed identify further partnerships and project possibilities for future Lifelong Learning Programme initiatives)
14:35 – 15.35 Roundtables - session 2
Two sessions of 30 minutes each.
(Note: Delegates will have time throughout the conference to explore project outcomes and results and indeed identify further partnerships and project possibilities for future Lifelong Learning Programme initiatives)
15.35 – 17:00 Networking and Transnational collaboration: Mobility Marketplace and project presentations (delegates with ideas for projects and partnership can prepare posters presenting briefly the concept.
Saturday 27th October
10:00 – 11:00 Results of workshops: key recommendations from each workshop will be presented and discuss
11:00 – 11:30 Conference conclusions - Mr Kim von Bülow, CPH West
11:30 – 12:00 Announcement of 22nd EfVET Annual International Conference in 2013
Closing of the conference - Mr Peter Hodgson, President, EfVET.

Past Conferences
EFVET 2011
EFVET 2010
EFVET 2009
EFVET 2008
EFVET 2007
EFVET 2006
EFVET 2005
EFVET 2004
EFVET 2003
EFVET 2002
EFVET 2001

Presidency Conference on Lifelong Guidance (ELGPN). 24.10.2012. Location: Palm Beach Hotel, Larnaca.
The main objective of this Conference is to examine the transversal role of Lifelong Guidance in meeting the Europe 2020 priorities. The conference seeks to enhance structured mutual policy learning between the EU Member States in developing their national guidance systems. The agenda covers selected national examples and European level syntheses of Lifelong Guidance Policies, Structures and Services as well as discussion on the Cyprus Resolution on Lifelong Guidance.

22.10.2012 - 23.10.2012 Location: 'FILOXENIA' Conference Centre, Lefkosia (Nicosia).
The Directors General of Vocational Education and Training of the Member States, representatives of candidate countries and other VET stakeholders and social partners are expected to participate.
The objective of the Meeting is to discuss and promote the Bruges Communiquand more specifically vocational excellence and equity, which will be achieved through the modernisation of VET systems in Europe. During the second day, the Meeting will focus on the pathways between Vocational Education and Training and Higher Education, and vice versa.

22.10.2012 - 23.10.2012. Location: 'FILOXENIA' Conference Centre, Lefkosia (Nicosia).
Expected participants are Directors General and other governmental officers responsible for higher education from all Member States, representatives from the candidate countries, the European Commission as well as other relevant bodies and organizations.
The aim of the Meeting is to give the participants an opportunity to debate current topics on the European higher education in line with the objectives of the EU modernization agenda for Higher Education and the Bologna Process, and share best practices.
During the first day, emphasis will be given to Quality Assurance and Internationalization of Higher Education and Excellence in Teaching in Higher Education. On the second day, DG for Higher Education and DG for VET will join, to discuss expanding opportunities and raising skills: Opening pathways between Vocational Education and Training and Higher Education.

The "HR Strategy for Researchers" supports research institutions and funding organisations in the implementation of the Charter & Code in their policies and practices. The concrete implementation of the Charter & Code by research institutions will render them more attractive to researchers looking for a new employer or for a host for their research project. Funding organisations implementing the Charter & Code principles will contribute to the attractiveness of their national research systems and to the attractiveness of the European Research Area more generally. The logo "HR Excellence in Research" will identify the institutions and organisations as providers and supporters of a stimulating and favourable working environment.
Since the adoption of the Commission Recommendation on the Charter & Code in 2005, over 1 200 institutions from 35 countries in Europe and abroad (and European/international organisations) have expressed their explicit support for the Charter & Code and 102 have obtained the Commission's "HR Excellence in Research" badge.
What is the "Human Resources Strategy for Researchers"?
The "Human Resources Strategy for Researchers" is a tool that helps employers and funders to put the principles of the Charter & Code into practice. It has the following features:
    It is implemented by individual research institutions and funding organisations on a voluntary basis;
    It is based on an internal self-assessment and respects the autonomy of the institutions;
    It is as simple and light in terms of administration as is possible, avoiding cumbersome procedures and recognising the variety of situations across institutions and national research systems;
    It is not a prerequisite for participating in the EU Research Framework Programme;
    It is a transparent approach that provides easily accessible public information on the actions of participating institutions and organisations to implement the Charter & Code principles.
How does it work?
The "Human Resources Strategy for Researchers" is articulated in five main steps:
    An internal analysis by the participating research institution or funding organisation, involving all key players, to compare policies and practices against the Charter & Code principles;
    On the basis of the results of this analysis, the participating institution or organisation develops its own HR strategy for researchers which should include a concrete action plan. This document is made public;
    The analysis and action plan are then reviewed and acknowledged by the European Commission. The acknowledgement implies the right to use the 'HR Excellence in Research' logo;
    Progress in the implementation of the strategy and action plan is subjected to a self-assessment after 2 years;
    An external evaluation is carried out at least every 4 years.
The HR strategy's five steps in more detail
Step 1 - The research institution or funding organisation carries out an internal analysis according to a standard template grouping all the 40 Charter & Code principles in 4 areas ('Ethical and professional aspects', 'Recruitment', 'Working conditions & social security' and 'Training').
The internal analysis is an assessment of rules and practices in place vis-a-vis the Charter & Code principles. In order to be transparent, the analysis must involve all key players concerned (i.e. Rector, HR managers, researchers, etc.).
Where other HR initiatives of a similar nature are already in place, the "HR Strategy for Researchers" could be easily embedded in them. Thus, tools other than the suggested standard template for the internal analysis may be used, provided that the same type of information is gathered (relevant legislation, current practices, actions required by when and by whom etc).
The use of indicator systems and staff opinion surveys is recommended, as they are important supporting tools to implement the HR strategy according to institutional and national rules and practices.
Step 2 - The research institution or funding organisation publishes its "Human Resources Strategy for Researchers" on its website and on the European EURAXESS Rights webpage. It should summarise the main results of the internal analysis and present the actions proposed to ensure and/or improve alignment with the Charter & Code principles.
The HR Strategy should include clear engagement to carry out internal (within the institution/organisation) and external (at regional or national level) awareness-raising actions on the Charter & Code principles. Only the main results of the internal analysis have to be published, while internal/confidential information is obviously not included.
Step 3 - Provided that the above steps are formally respected, the European Commission "acknowledges" that the participating research institution or funding organisation has adopted a Human Resources Strategy for Researchers.
The acknowledgment by the EC is based on a rapid formal check of the respect for the procedure. This check focuses on whether the publication of the HR Strategy is based on an internal analysis and the involvement of relevant actors.
Once the European Commission has acknowledged the efforts, the research institution or funder will be rewarded with the 'HR Excellence in Research' logo, which can be placed on its website. With this logo, participating research institutions will benefit from increased visibility as employers committed to the principles of the Charter & Code. This will help them to attract the best researchers from around the globe. Participating research funders will be able to use the logo to promote their respective national research system and the European Research Area as a whole as an attractive place for researchers from all over the world to develop their careers.
Step 4 - The research institution or funding organisation implements its HR strategy and conducts a self-assessment within the framework of its existing internal quality assurance mechanisms. This self-assessment should be undertaken regularly, at a minimum every second year.
Based on the self-assessment, the HR Strategy for Researchers is updated as necessary and published on the website or the participating research institution or funding organisation and on the European EURAXESS Rights Webpage.
In order to avoid cumbersome procedures, the self-assessment should be simple. If the standard template was used for the internal analysis (Step 1), it may be used for these purposes as well. No additional reports are required.
Step 5 - External evaluation: at least every 4 years, the research institution or funding organisation drafts a short report, showing the progress made towards the objectives of its HR Strategy for Researchers and its compliance with the principles of the Charter & Code.
The report is evaluated either by a panel of external reviewers or through national quality assurance mechanisms, such as National Evaluation Agencies, peer reviews, etc. The evaluation should at least focus on the coherence between the HR Strategy and the actions carried out.
If the evaluation is positive, the European Commission's acknowledgment is confirmed. If there are reservations from the evaluators regarding actual progress, recommendations for improvements within a reasonable timeframe are made. If, at the end of the period granted for improvements it emerges that no adequate actions to implement the recommendations have been undertaken, the acknowledgment by the European Commission is withdrawn.
The choice between the national quality assurance mechanisms, external reviewers or any other appropriate mechanism is made either at institutional or national/regional level.
What does the 'HR Excellence in Research' logo stand for?
Research institutions can use the logo to help promote themselves to prospective research talent as providers of a stimulating and favourable work environment. The logo also conveys to researchers their commitment to fair and transparent recruitment and appraisal procedures. Funding organisations can use the logo to increase their visibility as organisations actively promoting their national research system and/or the European Research Area more generally as an attractive destination for researchers from all over the world.
Which organisations have already expressed an interest in the HR Strategy for Researchers?
The list of institutions and organisations that have already declared their intention to use the HR Strategy for Researchers to align their policies and practices to the principles of the Charter & Code can be found here.
List of institutions and organisations having received the Commission acknowledgement for their progress in the context of the HR Strategy (by country)
The list can be viewed here.
What about similar initiatives already in place?
Where such initiatives/mechanisms are undertaken at national/regional level (as for example, the "UK mechanism for demonstrating sector-wide and institutional alignment with the European Charter and Code") , these mechanisms may be considered as equivalent to the "HR Strategy for Researchers", provided that they serve the same purposes with respect to the Charter & Code and that the key requirements are met. In addition to the formal endorsement of the Charter & Code principles, these initiatives should include an internal analysis vis-a-vis the Charter & Code, the results of which (including the actions to be taken) should be made public. Their implementation is to be self-assessed with an external evaluation at least every four years.